Another test of the castle doctrine

Hi all:

This appeared in todays Miami Herald: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/10/23/2468769/road-rage-shooting-tests-self.html

Mike V.

It's quite telling that the newspaper article goes into detail about what Mr. Wonder did after the shooting.

Some of the things he did may well be different from the "standard advice" we throw about regarding what to do or not do following a self defense shooting incident. But as his attorney notes, what he did after the incident does not effect whether or not the shooting itself met the "stand your ground" law's requirements for immunity from prosecution.

Hopefully the DA in Fla knows the difference between what the law says and what he might feel about what the guy did afterwards.

stay safe.

Pettit [cop], who was off duty at the time, followed Wonder [elderly citizen] into a post office parking lot and yelled at him before Wonder opened fire. Pettit’s daughter, 12 years old at the time, witnessed the shooting.

Click to expand...

Isn't it illegal to have firearms on PO property?

Elderly man with health problems facing (apparently much younger, probably more fit) road rager who followed him to a safe, public place & was still verbally abusive...
I'm leaning toward saying this was an appropriate use of force.

In addition, the road rager was an FBI agent off duty. As to the weapon on PO property, not that I know of, only inside.

Mike V.

mavidal said:

In addition, the road rager was an FBI agent off duty. As to the weapon on PO property, not that I know of, only inside.

Mike V.

Click to expand...

Possession on USPS property is verboten, as is possession inside the building. Don't have the cite handy so will ask that you trust me on that. Or look up several civil suits under way for folks that do not have RFD and must go to the PO to get their mail to see what they are fighting against.

Rule of Competing Harms comes into play. Road rage incident and alleged victim (yes, PC weasel-wording my way through here - just bear with it) pulls into the first/nearest convenient place to get off the road/away from the alleged assailant. Doing a Bad Thing to avoid a worse Bad Thing is recognized under common and case law as Not A Bad Thing.

stay safe.

skidmark said:

Don't have the cite handy so will ask that you trust me on that.

Click to expand...

18 U.S.C. 930 is what they claim, however there is debate as to whether or not they are correct in using that citation.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/44/930

930 is for a generic federal building or courthouse. 39CFR232.1 is the one with the prohibition on postal property.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

JoeSparky said:

930 is for a generic federal building or courthouse. 39CFR232.1 is the one with the prohibition on postal property.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I stand corrected. Thank you Joe!

The applicable rule says:

(l) Weapons and explosives. No person while on postal property may
carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either
openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for
official purposes.​

The interesting clause is "except for official purposes". Since the Supreme Court has determined that the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense is a fundamental and individual right, does that translate to an "official purpose"?

Rich7553 said:

"official purpose"?

Click to expand...

That State generally means 'official' as something that they do... 'Official' is the word used to separate the 'only ones' from lowly, unwashed 'us.'

Special, better than you, more deserving, superior, above, trumps your Rights, etc... That is what 'official' means.